3 ms·
I would say no because it seemed to me at the time that people understood the damage the PET’s killer poke could cause was more theoretical than actual. I took
by jmull 2y ago
I would say no because it seemed to me at the time that people understood the damage the PET’s killer poke could cause was more theoretical than actual.
I took it more as a kind of lesson that software could sometimes break out of the normal execution model it runs in, sometimes in very unexpected ways and with possibly significant consequences. (I was just a kid, so probably my mother lead me there. She was an experienced systems architect, or whatever they called it at the time, and had plenty of practical experience with machines that were a lot more raw than the PET.)
I liked the PET, and while it had a better basic, monitor, and character set, it was lacking a graphics capability like the Apple ][. That’s what reduced PET sales. E.g., a C64 was basically a PET plus graphics & sound (w/enough memory to use them) and sold like gangbusters.
- tdeck 2y agoThe VIC-20 was basically a PET with color and no built in monitor, and it sold very well too. The key was that it was much cheaper - the PET line machines were thousands of dollars whereas the later VIC-20 and C64 were hundreds of dollars and provided great value for money.
- jmull 2y agoThe PET (with monitor) started a $795. The C64 was initially released at $595, which is pretty much the same considering that didn't include a monitor. But I would assume most of C64s were sold at a much lower price. I don't know its pricing history but I seem to recall the price dropped pretty quickly. My (very imperfect) memory says I got one in the early '80s about $399 and I think it was down to $299 not too long after that.